Bonus payments will be given to those doctors and hospitals that provide good quality care. | CON: With an increased population of individuals receiving healthcare from the government, there will be longer wait times, and potential decline in the quality of care given by doctors. | PRO: The PPACA tax promotes the general welfare because it makes health care more widely available and affordable. | CON: Congress is requiring that every person purchase health insurance or face penalties. | PRO: The health reform includes the largest health care tax cut in history for middle class families, helping to make insurance much more affordable for millions of families.
As statistics show, there has already been an increase in the cost of health care partially due to the shortage in health care practitioners and the need to offer higher reimbursement for treatments. If predictions are true, and there is a shortage of 125,000 physicians by the year 2025, the cost of health care will increase more rapidly. Because health care and therefore an individual’s life is considered priceless, there are demand shifters that often affect the demand curve of a health care product. As demonstrated in the example above, physician loyalties and experience are just two of the many types of demand shifters. This demand shifters can cause an even steeper rise in health care cost in the real world.
First the pro side, the first main issue is the fact that the 32 million Americans that don’t have health care will now have access to health care coverage. Many Americans can’t afford health care coverage and this policy lowers the cost so that more Americans will have the opportunity to get the coverage they need. Another pro is that people with preexisting conditions can no longer be denied coverage. Insurance companies have been getting away with denying people the coverage they need because they either get sick or because they have a preexisting condition and this policy puts an end to all of that. Lastly, the amount of personal bankruptcies will be reduced.
They do have a group of eight oncologist and two radiation oncologist have expressed interest in an affiliation with the hospital. The community needs are already great, with an expected increase in new cancer diagnosis of 34% in the next five years. Currently oncologist are operating at capacity and are actively recruiting new physicians. Also in line with the increased demand of physicians is the increase in demand for facilities, equipment to diagnose and treat patients, operating rooms, chemo units and advanced imaging equipment are also not keeping up with patient demand. The coordination of patients is also poor which can result in devastating delays in diagnosis and treatment of patients.
It seems that each year, Congress or our senior military leaders want to place additional constraints on this healthcare system. Some of these constraints help the system while others adversely affect our retirees and their dependents. Some examples of these adverse constraints are higher deductibles, higher catastrophic limits, and higher annual premiums. The reform of the current military healthcare system is proposed for FY2015. The current limits are $300 for the deductible, which under the new proposal will increase to $600 (Bushatz, 2014).
To achieve a cost saving target of $750,000 for the first quarter the first cost cutting measure I selected is reducing a proportion of the agency contracted staff. Making a reduction in the number of contracted staff member will save the company on the premiums they pay to the staffing agency and management fees. Additionally the skill level of the contracted staff could not be compared to the employees of the hospital, which has been
As for whether slashing military spending would deny us needed protection, one could as well ask whether we are safe today with policies that risk "blowback”, bankruptcy, and monetary disarray. All through the debate over health-care reform last year, I cast a somewhat jaundiced eye on those critics who said the United States could not afford it, because frequently those critics also seemed to be supporters of the Iraq war. Their thrift seemed to stop at the war’s edge. They said we could not afford health care, when we plainly could afford it, given our outlandish spending on a war of choice, to say nothing of a Wall Street bailout. $700 billion for the war.
They want to present the idea of a 401k-style plan. Which means, with the 401k- style plan, a veteran would have to wait at a “normal” retirement age, approximately around 62. Deceptively, the Defense Business Board claim that through the 401k-style plan it would save the government about $250 billion dollars over 20 years. Advocates believe that it would save capital and that it would be fairer to more people who are or were in the military because they could serve less than 20 years and get retirement pay at a normal retirement age. Yet, this still leaves many questions unanswered.
Passing health care reform does a lot more than give people health insurance. The Health Care Reform bill passing will be a huge impact on the U.S. There is going to be many changes in the U.S., for example insurance is going to be cheaper for people who couldn’t afford it. Over 31 million people are going to be able to afford health insurance. It is projected to put our budget and economy on a more stable path
1/27/12 GS-114 AB State of the Union Reflection Paper On January 24, 2012 the President of the United States of America gave his State of the Union address. The speech was titled “An America Built to Last”, I wanted to hear how he plans on fixing our financial crisis that has left over 10% of Americans out of work. Obama addressed many topics but one that really caught my attention was his plan to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States. President Obama wants to bring manufacturing jobs back to U.S. and he wants to start by giving companies tax breaks for staying and hiring here. “In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly 4 million jobs.